|
|
|
|
|
|
by lelanthran
973 days ago
|
|
|
> I never understood the longterm logic of protecting jobs by not using tools. Ever read thelastpsychiatrist? The website is dead now (and he may be too, for all I know), but he was on the money when talking about why a specific amount is paid by the state to the unemployed - it's the exact amount of money that would stop the idle masses from burning down the city. You don't understand it now, but you will if we had a transition to completely automated driving in a short period - those millions of unemployed drivers, that are now never going to be employed, are a risk to the city. |
|
|
That seems awfully pessimistic. There's a couple different reasons
- To stop the masses from uprising (as noted)
- Because the health of the society as a whole depends on the health of the people in the society. And sometimes you need safety nets for the people in that society, because people can't always do for themselves. Fire departments, unemployment, health care, education; these all fall into that category in one way or another. Some places provide all of these, some provide none, and most provide somewhere in the middle. In the end, we provide for those that can't because it's better for the society that we live in if we do. And we are all served by a better healthier society.